[yanka]

krystyn wrote:

Lewis the Second wrote: There's an inane trend of slagging off the very concept of Grassroots at the moment... Wow, that's simply not true.

Lewis the Second wrote:

Maybe I was a little harsh and exaggerative, but it certainly is happening, and it isn't healthy.

I'm sorry, but I'm so tired of seeing this misapplied, flawed, and uber-over-generalized assertion. As Ehsan wrote here, "we" are slagging off games that SUCK. So far, all the recent ones happen to be "grassroots", but frankly, I wish that we would stop labeling them thus (grassroots), as that is an insult to a number of grassroots PMs who have produced some of the best and most memorable games of the genre. Well, I suppose I shouldn't be speaking for them, but it is an insult to me personally, for example. ImNSho, the best, most professional, and most talented PM team to-date has been a grassroots one.

There is a difference between a game that is put on by a professional (yes, professional), talented, non-compensated PM team and a game that SUCKS.

In light of that, I'm not sure I share your concern. If you're concerned with the "inane trend of slagging off the very concept of Grassroots at the moment", then you can probably stop - nobody is gonna slag off a Karetao game simply because they've put it on "for the love of the game", I'm very certain of it. If you're concerned with the "inane trend of slagging off the very concept of GAMES THAT SUCK at the moment", then you should probably ask yourself just why you would expect people to not slag off games that suck.

EDIT: whoa, SpaceBass and jamesi sad the same thing, but much better, before I hit "submit".

[Abbot_Beryl]

No, no worries. I understand what's going on, and I'm not taking any of it personally. Too exhausted too, frankly. Most importantly, I just want to see a change, hopefully in a humane fashion.

I've realized now that the remark I made that jamesi commented came out quite wrong and I retract the statement.

I'm not sure there's much more that I can do other than my little input, and story, but in the end I think an explanation and confession like mine is a bit more helpful than just telling people what not to.

(By the way... I'm officially no longer replying to this thread, so, have fun! I wish you all the best.)

[jamesi]

Lewis the Second wrote:

There's an inane trend of slagging off the very concept of Grassroots at the moment, which is the most unhealthy thing that one could possibly do for the community, and tends to come across as fairly arrogant.

Funny, I thought the inane trend was to defend 'grassroots' games that implode, based on any number of factors. Most of us have been playing (and defending) grassroots games for years... what's arrogant is to come in and start shoveling crap like this around. The 'campaign against grassroots' is a fabricated lie based on spin and perception, and I for one am sick of hearing it. If you (and others) want to keep blaming others for the failures of various 'grassroots' PMs, that's your choice. But don't expect those of us who have cared for and nurtured this genre from its inception to sit back and take it.

Lewis the Second wrote:

It's the forum-posting equivelant of ARGN's decision to tag a 'warning' onto every indie game launched.

You want the YMMV tag removed from ARGN? Talk to ARGN about it. This has been discussed in other META threads and I guess some people just can't accept the answers given. Of course, I guess if ARG games would stop fizzling out after two hours/days/weeks it would make a difference.

I reiterate the point about Rose and her continued commitment to grassroots ARGs. Thanks imbri.

And, for those of you who keep throwing this term out there, make damn sure you know what it means before you accuse people of doing the opposite.

Lewis the Second wrote:

Come on. This is a community. Let's make it look like one.

Wow. So a community can't have differences in opinions? A community can't be disgruntled when something goes badly? I don't want to be a part of any community that conforms to one standard, or coddles the failures, thank you very much. And that probably makes me 'arrogant' and 'elitist', right? Right...

Abbot_Beryl wrote:

I'm just sad, that after going on about how the game is for the players, that I've only just now realized what kind of players we're trying to go out on a limb to entertain.

Oh? And what kinds of players are those? The kinds of players that expect a game to survive past its first week? The kinds of players that feel that preparedness and dedication aren't just buzzwords when talking about Puppetmastery? Or is it the kinds of players that have their own opinions? I've had the pleasure (or lack thereof) to experience a few PM-type people who feel that their game is more important than the people playing it, and that oppositional opinions need not apply. So maybe it's fair that I'm sad, after being a part of such a wonderful, cohesive community for so many years, that I'm constantly reminded what lengths the egotists will go to make their mark.

[SpaceBass]

Lewis the Second wrote:

There's an inane trend of slagging off the very concept of Grassroots at the moment ... Maybe I was a little harsh and exaggerative, but it certainly is happening, and it isn't healthy.

Actually, no there isn't. There is, however, an inane trend of people claiming that there is some huge conspiracy against grassroots games. I am not entirely sure where it comes from, but I suspect a lot of it is rooted in the feelings of some grassroots wannabe PMs having been hurt when their attempts at games were not welcomed with unqualified adoration, merely for the fact of their having existed.

This really has nothing to do with whether they are grassroots games or not, but is more about the fact that they sucked balls in one way or another. Players complain just as loudly about corporate attempts that suck too (cf. the Sable & Schuck slow melt, and the Our Colony pseudo-ARG fiasco), but we don't see those wannabe PMs whining about how everyone hates corporate games and why can't they all just have a chance blah blah blah.

Back on topic: Abbot, although there may be some criticism here that was directed at your personal situation or which you may take personally if it applies to you, I do not believe the majority of players harbor any animosity towards you. Rather, the criticism we see here is a product of many, many failed or failing attempts at games that have cropped up lately, and your situation allows us an anchor for our specific critiques of some very general ideas based on those failures. I do think this is a quite valuable discussion and hope that future aspiring PMs will take note and, more importantly, take these debates to heart, rather than assuming that "Well, that won't happen to me."

[Abbot_Beryl]

Well, I apologize. There's not much more to say. I'm not going to just say something you want me to say, nor am I going to try to argue.

I'm just sad, that after going on about how the game is for the players, that I've only just now realized what kind of players we're trying to go out on a limb to entertain.

No hard feelings. Call me selfish, but if I havn't helped others, I've helped myself I suppose. Cool.

I really don't want to be the center of anger, despite the fact that I can't really avoid it due to being a teenage grassroots pm...

*I'll close my eyes, and if I can't see them, they can't see me...*

[L.Boomer]

Abbot_Beryl,

Rose was absolutly correct with her post. If you had paid any attention at all, you would have known that we have had more than enough examples of what not to do with creating a game. Yes, it was nice of you to own up to your mistake, but that doesn't excuse it.

Abbot wrote:

We can spend hours upon hours solving puzzles but we can't do anything about keeping down failures and instructing new PMs?

If you would have spent a little more time browsing the Meta threads, you would find topic after topic discussing how to keep down failures and what the "new" pm needs to create a successful game. The information is there, you just didn't look for it. The biggest recommendation being to get experience working BTS on someone elses game before jumping head first into your great new experience. This is further shown by our Anonymous poster who believes that the whole 7 hours that the PM "team" combined is putting into their game is enough. From my experience, that is maybe a minimum amount of time for a good puzzle trail with a very light story.

The second recommendation is to not be afraid to ask for help or input from those that have been through it before. There are plenty of people that will help "ahead of time" to give advice, criticism, and probably even help you out BTS. "Ahead of Time" being the operative words here. You said yourself that you knew it was futile to take on the project by yourself...yet that is exactly what you did. Obviously you read that recommendation but chose to ignore it. You should at least have someone to help playtest your puzzles before release and to be able to stand in should something happen that would make you unavailiable for any amount of time, and if you still insist on trying to make a game yourself, maybe try it out on a small scale with some of your friends before unleashing it on the rest of us. No matter how much you prepare, there will always be things that you in now way expected to happen that will occur during gameplay (those with previous experience know this). Backup plans are a must have, not an afterthought.

Abbot wrote:

The first step in creating an ARG is participating in one, obviously.

And here is the kicker. That is the ill percieved thought that seems to be running rampant though the ranks of inexperienced PM's lately. First lurking and participating are not quite the same thing, but that is a different issue. While participating in a game is kind of considered a prerequisite to creating a game (in my opinion playing one is just not enough, you should experience a couple of games first) the actual first step in creating a game is knowing what it is you are trying to create, and how to create it. It is all too apparent that many of these failed attempts are coming from the misconception that just because you played a game, now you can create one. Research and experience are the key to a successful game, and we can keep preaching this till we are blue in the face, but the point doesn't seem to get through. Wether it is ignorance, or arrogance that is behind it I am not sure, but neither is a valid excuse to ignore what has been said time and time again.

Abbot wrote:

It looks like I'm far off. It seems the only way to narrow down the amount of games out there is to yell and complain and rant until you scare all the less fortunate PMs out there. Oh wow, that's starting to make sense to me.

Abbot again, had you done a little bit of research you would have found that the community has reacted accordingly to these failed games. First it was sort of let by without much comment, then it garnered the need for a designation, then it started to get criticism in hopes of quelling the surge of failed attempts, all this time with plenty of great advice given to stop these incidents. Now we are at the point of Ranting because we are reaching the end of the cycle of accepting the same problems over and over.
So sadly yes, your game is another good example of what not to do.


Yes, you did put more effort and creativity into your failed venture, than others have recently . For that congratulations and I am sure we will be seeing your name again. Hopefully next time under better circumstances,(and preferrably as a person BTS on someone elses game). We are in no way trying to discourage people from trying to create games, we just really need the failures to stop.

[Lewis the Second]

Maybe I was a little harsh and exaggerative, but it certainly is happening, and it isn't healthy.

But yeah, back to the thread.

[krystyn]

Lewis the Second wrote:

There's an inane trend of slagging off the very concept of Grassroots at the moment...

Wow, that's simply not true.




Also, as to filtering? I dislike the idea intensely. Way too highly subjective; a slippery slope of choosing based on who happens to be around and involved in the community at any given time. Whim and Politics could conceivably become even unconscious players in such a system. I say booooo.

[Puppet Master ;D]

konamouse wrote:

Quick, some established/experienced PM, pick this kid up for your writing team.

Already got him, first thing I did last night ;D (and yes, we do have a team, and good sized one at that)

Expect something... well you'll see when, just don't be expecting something from HKDL... well not on aim at least

[imbri]

Lewis the Second wrote:

Moreover, yes, constructive criticism is fantastic, but that post offered nothing but frankly rude comments to the PM.

And yours offered?

Honestly, if you've been around the meta threads at all you know that Rose's thoughts are anything but, "Well, it was grassroots, what do you expect? Don't even bother next time." She happens to be one of the most supportive of the meta-heads when it comes to discussing grassroots games and is, frankly, because of her that I'm as reasoned as I am in this post.

But now you've just served (and I took a healthy bite) a nice portion of thread derailing. Twas much better when we were actually being constructive.

So, back to that...

[Lewis the Second]

imbri wrote:

Lewis the Second wrote: Edit: Rose, what's with the attitude? I wholehearted support Rose and her attitude. She has every right to it and, frankly, has many reasons to have it. I have to be honest and admit that I feel similarly. Having spoken with others on the matter, I know that we are not alone with those feelings. Despite those feelings, or perhaps because of them, we can use this thread as the author intended it. Well, not to serve his ego, but to constructively point out the errors of what he has done so as to help others not make those same mistakes.

But that's not what her attitude was. Maybe I misunderstood it, but the post came across more as: "Well, it was grassroots, what do you expect? Don't even bother next time."

Moreover, yes, constructive criticism is fantastic, but that post offered nothing but frankly rude comments to the PM. That's not going to solve anything. Yes, the game failed, yes, we're disappointed, yes, the PM messed up a bit. But that can all be pointed out politely and constructively.

Come on. This is a community. Let's make it look like one.

[Lewis the Second]

Abbot_Beryl: don't get too put off by Rose's comments. There's an inane trend of slagging off the very concept of Grassroots at the moment, which is the most unhealthy thing that one could possibly do for the community, and tends to come across as fairly arrogant. It's the forum-posting equivelant of ARGN's decision to tag a 'warning' onto every indie game launched. The majority of people here would love to play a decent Grassroots game once in a while because, hidden amongst the trash, there are many. It's a shame yours didn't get going, because it certainly looked good.

[Abbot_Beryl]

To Anon, imbri, and the rest: thank you for your input. I highly value the proffesional opponion. This is how we grow! And I am certainly willing to grow.


To rose and the rest: I apologize for coming off in a way that looked like I was defending myself. I in no way meant to do so. Hell, if you wanted I could get on my knees and beg your forgiveness, but that wouldn't help, nor is that what I need to do. I WANT my story to explain the work I put in (whether it be little or not) and show that it doesn't matter how much work is put in, but instead to show how much responsibility PMs have for their players. Yeah, I thousand rants out there say exactly what your post said. But please, please understand that whether you like me or not, or trust me or not, or respect me or not, I am on your side.

Quote:

Just so I understand, you followed these boards (without a log-in), saw the damage caused by games imploding, and decided to launch on your own a half-finished effort? Which you cared so little about that you couldn't bother to follow up a letter that you mailed a month ago? So you deleted all your work instead?

YES! And that is the point. Don't you think that after reading my sad tale, it might prevent others from doing the same in the future? You're arguing for me.

Quote:

We don't need this learning experience, thanks very much. If you had read the multitude of post here about grassroots games and taken them seriously you would know that.

Maybe I don't understand what that means, but it seems to me that you're getting angry about games imploading... and in the same message don't want to do something about? What should we do to culprits like myself? Am I off to jail? Do I get a flogging? Lose my PM privelages?

The problem is that the only way to stop these disasters is to identify them before they begin. Which is impossible. But can't we at least show them what can so easily go wrong before hand, and save the trouble and anger of both the PM and the players! No?

It looks like I'm far off. It seems the only way to narrow down the amount of games out there is to yell and complain and rant until you scare all the less fortunate PMs out there. Oh wow, that's starting to make sense to me.

Can someone please just explain to me, aren't we, the players, putting ourself in this situation on purpose? Don't we want to play GOOD games? Or what? We can spend hours upon hours solving puzzles but we can't do anything about keeping down failures and instructing new PMs?

[imbri]

Anon... wrote:

TIME: This is a tricky one. Since we launched our game, I've spent - I'd estimate - around five hours of every day working on it. The other main PM has put in maybe two or so a day. The more minor behind-the-curtain members have put in nowhere near this, but still an amount of time. Suffice it to say, if playing an ARG is pretty deep, actually running one really, genuinely takes over your existance. You're right: you've got to be sure you have the time and commitment to sit it out.

You can't be serious here, can you? I mean that's only 7 hours a day! That's nothing. Honestly, we put in about that on our training games which are just ARG like things and, really, require minimal work comparatively. I'd say Metacortechs probably averaged 36 hours a day and Lockjaw about 40 (we weren't very efficient back then). Again those are averages and may be a bit on the low side. Seriously, these things take a lot of time.

7 hours? wow.

- b

[Anon...]

Likewise, posting anonymously because, well, it'd be stupid not to.

Bobby: firstly, kudos. From the looks of the trailhead and surrounding information, I had honestly suspected either a very well crafted game by an experienced indie writer, or even a commercial project. That you're fifteen and this was to be your first project is phenomenal, and the beginnings of something beyond anything I could have written at your age.

Quote:

And so, I threw together a few puzzles, bought gypsybeta.com, that sort of thing. Wrote a story; threw in some death, a butler, a company, and a software application called Gypsy Beta, (for which I actually created fake screenshots and recorded my girlfriend’s voice in my neighbors recording studio to be the AI interface), and finally, completed the balance with a much needed spiritual message therapist named Sarah.

And that is absolutely phenomenal. Seriously, that is beyond the vast majority of startup writers and PMs. The amount of detail you had ready was very impressive, I have to say.

You mention the few main problems you hit and I think it's very unfortunate that you just missed the mark on them. We're talking literally five minutes work to solve them. I'll detail a bit so you know for future reference.

THE TRAILHEAD: The first problem was the running time of the game was to be drastically cut due to the length it took for the trailhead to be made public. This is a real shame, because it was completely out of control as soon as you sent the letter. Thing is, when it's sent to a single organisation and it's sitting round in mailboxes for months, you never quite know when - indeed, if ever - it will appear. Perhaps running whois searches on a few community members and directly hitting known players may have been a more immediate way of launching.

THE WHOIS SEARCHES: They found your home number. That's a big problem. Of course, there's a way of writing problems like that into the story afterwards ('Oh, they used to be at this address, but they moved' or whatever), but this can generally be avoided from the outset. A few dollars/pounds/whatever can buy you whois protection, which basically means that all the domain registrant's details are made private. Thus, you can avoid OOG addresses and numbers being found.

BUDGET: This is something that has to be planned before, really. You either have enough money to register those sites, to mail those packages etc... or you don't. The game I'm currently part of running has cost me in the vicinity of $70/£40/whatever so far. It's not a huge amount, but if you want things to make sense and you want things to seem credible, there's always going to be a cost involved. Other anonymous fella: wow. Obviously I don't know whhich ARG you're running, but to do it with a budget of *nothing* is really a brave thing. I wish you the best of luck in it - and I think I've narrowed it down to three different games it could be... two of which I'm actively playing as well, so I *do* wish you luck.

TIME: This is a tricky one. Since we launched our game, I've spent - I'd estimate - around five hours of every day working on it. The other main PM has put in maybe two or so a day. The more minor behind-the-curtain members have put in nowhere near this, but still an amount of time. Suffice it to say, if playing an ARG is pretty deep, actually running one really, genuinely takes over your existance. You're right: you've got to be sure you have the time and commitment to sit it out.

Then, of course, there's the player interaction. Put simply, however strong your story is, you're not ever going to be able to tell it as is straight away, because player activity always changes that. Your players found your home number: you had to come up with excuses for that. In the game we're running, we've had a load of bizarre incidents: people misreading clues, people thinking OOG stuff is IG, even - quite maliciously, if you ask me - somebody adding their own little 'clue' to the mix, which led absolutely nowhere because, well, they weren't part of the PM team and had no clue - and, of course, no permission - to do anything. There are always incidents to overcome, and you always have to be on your toes to resolve them.

However, the start of your game was absolutely fantastic, and I urge you not to just give up on ARGs in total. You know what? I don't care that you've revealed your identity. If you relaunched this next time you have a couple of months on your hands, I'd be first to dive straight back into it.

Good luck.